Laver vs Sampras on clay?

Good one.IMO, Laver would keep Sampras far from the net, with those rolling semitopspin fh and greatly angled and deep sliced BH and would take the net first.The slow clay surface would take speed off Pete´s great first serve and Laver would come to the net on Sampras second serve.

Laver knew how to slide on the clay much better than Sampras, so he would play % backcourt tennis until the opening would come.The big forehand from Pete, which was so hard to deal with, would not be so fast on clay and Laver´s ability to reach any ball would make a difference at the passing shot.

Those dream matchups are always speculative to rate. If i put in some conemporary players, who had similar styles, i would name Gonzalez for Laver and Korda (or Leconte) for Sampras. On clay, Laver hadn't the biggest of problems with Gonzalez, his topspin was working very well on clay (he learnt his game on antbed, which is similar to clay), his lobs and drop shots could change or break the rhythm of the opponent. Sampras had often difficulties with Korda, whose backhand was similar in execution und deception of direction to Laver's, but who was inferior in offensive play.

Now that here is a biassed poster that thinks tennis pool has never been so large and international, let´s show him through facts he is completely wrong.Comparing 80´s to 2000´s...

Stronger countries in 2000´s ( male ):

Brasil
Russia ( although not by much )
Serbia
Croatia
Spain
Britain ( but just one great player and that´s it)
Netherlands ( until Verkerk quit)

Even:

France (Noah,Leconte,Forget,Tulasne vs Simon,Monfils,Benetteau and Tsonga)and Argentina are even ( Clerc,Vilas,Mancini vs Nalbandian,Coria,Gaudio or Del Potro)
Australia, even at the top ( Cash vs Hewitt but a lot more of top 100 players in the 80´s)
Switzerland is also the same case (Gunthardt,Hlasek and Rosset vs Federer and Wavrinka)

People talk as if Sampras had NO conquests on clay, and beat just a bunch of mugs and no talented clay courters.

NOT true at all. Under his old coach Gullickson, Sampras was a very competent clay court winning Davis Cup, Rome, getting far at the French, and posting big wins over guys like Muster, Courier, Bruguera, Agassi, Kafelnikov etc.

Sampras obviously wasn't clay court "elite" but under his old coach, he was capable of beating ANYONE on any given day on clay.

Hell prime for prime, Sampras beat more big names on clay then a lot of other all time greats did.

Click to expand...

lol, nice try.

the "big names" Pete beat on clay weren't anywhere close to their primes.

The world is a complex, complicated, and subtle place full of rapidly changing or hitherto unknown layers of information. Plus I often learn something new every day, so one cannot hold too rigidly to opinions based on possibly incomplete, fallible, and finite knowledge.

Now that here is a biassed poster that thinks tennis pool has never been so large and international, let´s show him through facts he is completely wrong.Comparing 80´s to 2000´s...

Stronger countries in 2000´s ( male ):

Brasil
Russia ( although not by much )
Serbia
Croatia
Spain
Britain ( but just one great player and that´s it)
Netherlands ( until Verkerk quit)

Even:

France (Noah,Leconte,Forget,Tulasne vs Simon,Monfils,Benetteau and Tsonga)and Argentina are even ( Clerc,Vilas,Mancini vs Nalbandian,Coria,Gaudio or Del Potro)
Australia, even at the top ( Cash vs Hewitt but a lot more of top 100 players in the 80´s)
Switzerland is also the same case (Gunthardt,Hlasek and Rosset vs Federer and Wavrinka)